- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What if we hadn't halted our lunar program?
Posted on 3/27/17 at 1:49 am to robertLSU
Posted on 3/27/17 at 1:49 am to robertLSU
quote:
Why would aliens come all the way to our solar system just to sit on the moon and then when we finally figure out how to get there they just tell us "go away and don't come back".
Who said it was aliens?
1
Posted on 3/27/17 at 2:27 am to PowerTool
This is why I come to the OT on nightshift.
My thought, hitting the moon isn't that hard of a thing to do. Everyday people are impressed by it or find it impossible because they have no concept of what it takes. Or that it is mathematics and manpower.
My thought, hitting the moon isn't that hard of a thing to do. Everyday people are impressed by it or find it impossible because they have no concept of what it takes. Or that it is mathematics and manpower.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 5:40 am to Hangit
quote:
am waiting for someone to explain how we flew a frame, covered by a beer can, through the Van Allen radiation belts.
Not sure why. It's no big mystery.
1) The belts are charged particle radiation. Alpha + beta. Which are ideally stopped by thin, not dense material. A sheet of aluminum foil, as thin as it is, can be an effective beta blocker. Using heavier shielding, not only super expensive in space travel, can actually produce more harmful X-rays.
2) They used launch trajectories to avoid the inner belts entirely, and passed through the thinnest part of the outer belt.
Most radiation they took were from gamma emissions from the sun. And it was far less than what you would get working year round on a terrestrial nuclear reactor.
Hope the wait was worth it.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 5:41 am to Volvagia
I like that this exact question was asked on Reddit this week; reached the front page.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 5:50 am to Passing Wind
quote:
do it on the space station full time? With resupply coming via subsequent trips.
Because the ISS allows for micro gravity research. You can't replicate those conditions on the earth or the moon.
So comparing the two is an ignorant one. Research on the moon would be like research on earth,except fedEx doesn't deliver and you hop around more.
quote:
It's also viewed as a potential hub for further space exploration into deeper areas. Way to think small though.
And when we are prepared for that, we'll probably do it.
The question is why don't we do it now. And the answer is that there is no practical value for it. That is still the case. And using the argument that it can serve as a launching post for missions that also have little practical value isn't exactly a good one.
Outside of Mars and the moon, I seriously doubt there will be manned missions anywhere in the solar system in the next 1-200 years. Maybe even longer.
Sending missions is just for bragging rights. There is nothing you can currently suggest for a solar system mission that can't be 100% accomplished with a robot for 10% of the cost and without risking the lives of anyone who even on the best case scenario who would have to spend years and years, maybe a decade in total away from friends and family.
Who would want that?
This post was edited on 3/27/17 at 5:52 am
Posted on 3/27/17 at 5:56 am to pioneerbasketball
There it is the trust comes out.
Posted on 3/27/17 at 5:56 am to Passing Wind
quote:
Some people say there's a damn good reason we've never been back to the moon.
Moon Wurms
Posted on 3/27/17 at 6:00 am to TDFreak
I love how the republicans in this thread are wanting/encouraging more government spending on various space trips. Will we be playing golf on Mars too?
Posted on 3/27/17 at 6:01 am to fr33manator
We'd be farther along with establishing a moon base (not colony).
NASA's problem is that it got too good at moonshots such that became less notable. Once the true disaster of LBJs "guns and butter and welfare" economy really took hold in the early 70s, it was real easy to see NASA as an area to cut to keep giving free shite to poors.
NASA's problem is that it got too good at moonshots such that became less notable. Once the true disaster of LBJs "guns and butter and welfare" economy really took hold in the early 70s, it was real easy to see NASA as an area to cut to keep giving free shite to poors.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News